On this particular view, I run "Gain Priority" profile 0-50 during the "day" and 0-100 at Night. Works fine for me and any Critter I detect there, isn't in a hurry usuallly. The only "Motion Blur" in this view was about 3 years ago one night about 2:30am, when a kid thought he would like to "borrow" my catalytic converter. I think he would have run a fairly good "quarter mile" time, as I was still up and opened the door to put an "auxiliary light source" on where I projected him to be. He was half way down the public road and accelerating the last glimpse I had...
Just keep in mind that just about any camera can be tuned to show a decent low/no light image of a static subject. The difference comes when there is movement. The better the camera, the better chance you have of getting an image that you can "identify" a subject. Of course your intended "goal" for each camera is an important consideration. If you don't care about getting images that are clear enough and sharp enough for "identification" of a stranger, then it opens the door to use cameras that aren't the best at low/no light situations. However if you want to be able to use your camera footage to identify strangers, then it is wise to stick to the suggested sensor size vs pixel count chart.
I also have zero familiarity with any type of bullet.
Can’t use a bullet to compare to anything so I made up this chart which simply tells you what is good/borderline/bad for night time motion capturing:
Everyone shops for a camera with a different approach to what might be the best camera for their install. I always check MP against sensor size as a way to remove undesirable cameras from my search. Once I found a camera with a desirable MP and sensor combo, I would then dig deeper on FOV...
That's why I include decimal equivalents, for those of you that have zero experience with real firearms. Given the number of people that have either served in the Armed Forces, own firearms or shoot recreationally, well over 60% of the population, bullets make a reasonable means of comparison. If it triggers you, I apologize, but too bad.
Just keep in mind that just about any camera can be tuned to show a decent low/no light image of a static subject. The difference comes when there is movement. The better the camera, the better chance you have of getting an image that you can "identify" a subject. Of course your intended "goal" for each camera is an important consideration. If you don't care about getting images that are clear enough and sharp enough for "identification" of a stranger, then it opens the door to use cameras that aren't the best at low/no light situations. However if you want to be able to use your camera footage to identify strangers, then it is wise to stick to the suggested sensor size vs pixel count chart.
That's why it is important to have defined goals for what you are trying to accomplish with each camera. If your goal is to identify a subject (that is likely going to be moving) in very low/no light, that is probably going to require a different camera than someone that wants to monitor a low/no light scene, but doesn't need the detail to be high enough to identify a stranger in a police lineup.
In any case, it is important for people to understand what cameras are capable of so that they aren't sucked into purchasing the wrong camera for their needs. That's a lot of what this forum is all about - educating people so they can make informed decisions that are appropriate for their situations.
Unfortunately what happens far too often is that people make uniformed decisions and don't realize their mistake until it is too late - they have a situation where they captured footage of an event that they would like to use to identify a subject only to find out that their actual camera footage of the subject is so devoid of sharpness and details that it is impossible to make any sort of identification.
